On Saturday 24 November 2001 6:47, Matt Mihaly wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Nov 2001, Lars Duening wrote:
>> I think the same applies to the relation of P&P RPGs to Muds (and
>> also to the relation of real-life to realism in Muds): they are a
>> good for inspiration, but in the end Muds have to do things in
>> their own unique way in order to succeed. And like movies split
>> up in genres with their own conventions, there won't be just One
>> Right Way for Muds to handle things - big online worlds will work
>> in a slightly different way than smaller Muds.
Definitely; muds are not P&P RPGs, and to simply copy things from
P&P RPGs without recognizing the differences is silly. On the other
hand, though, that doesn't mean that none of the techniques of P&P
RPGs are useful -- only that they shouldn't be used blindly or
unthinkingly.
> I may be slightly ignorant of the diversity of offerings in the
> P&P RPG market, but it strikes me that P&P RPGs are really only
> particularly relevant to a sub-set of MUDs, not MUDs generally. I
> speak of PvE MUDs generally, as it doesn't seem to me that the P&P
> RPGs I'm familiar with work well at all in a highly competitive
> PvP or, more to the point, Group v. Group environment. Some of the
> language is shared (hitpoints, for instance), but the focus of the
> world itself is quite different.
That mainly leads to differences in GMing technique, though. A good
P&P RPG system's *mechanics* are perfectly usable for group
vs. group conflicts.
--
|\ _,,,---,,_ Travis S. Casey <efindel at earthlink.net>
ZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ No one agrees with me. Not even me.
|,4- ) )-,_..;\ ( `'-'
'---''(_/--' `-'\_)
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nuhttps://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev